A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life

[Hussar]

Does that count for NPCs too? In 4e monsters don't get this benefit (and it is smaller, only negative bloodied, but that is still a lot, PCs are rarely killed outright).

By the rules, yes, this applies to NPC's. Although, I think that most DM's, like myself, ignore that rule and simply rule that anything that goes to 0 dies. However, by the rules, no, everything is supposed to get death saves.

------

Umm, if you killed someone with a pillow or a knife [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], you'd be charged with manslaughter, not assault, and, certainly if you attempted to smother someone with a pillow, they certainly could charge you with assault with intent.

But, arguing from a position of legalities, isn't really going to get anywhere.

You're trying to apply a specific definition of "lethal" as in the legal definition, to the argument, and I think that's where we're getting tripped up, because, to me, lethal means, "something that kills you". A lethal dose of a drug is enough of a drug to kill you. If it didn't kill you, then it wasn't a lethal dose.

Being shot with a gun may be lethal, if you die. If you didn't die, then it wasn't a lethal wound.

But, all that being said, you're still ignoring the fact that you cannot narrate any wound until after everything is done. Say you fireball the target and drop it below 0 HP. What wounds has it actually taken? You cannot narrate it as a lethal wound, because it hasn't died yet. In fact, until that 3rd death save is failed, you cannot narrate any wound as being life threatening. Because, otherwise, it doesn't make much sense that your arterial spray is healed 100% by the next day.

Now, lots of DM's ignore this and fair enough, but, by the mechanics of the game, you cannot actually narrate any wound until combat is completely finished or the target is truly dead. Because, frankly, you cannot know what any of those wounds are until either of those two conditions are met. Either they are minor wounds that are easily ignored (healed in 24 hours) or they are mortal wounds.

Y'know, that might be a better word to use - mortal rather than lethal. A fireball can, potentially, inflict mortal wounds, but, by all odds, unless it outright kills that target, it's extremely unlikely. All "knocking out the target" really does is save you a Medicine check to stabilize a target. Which, odds are, will survive on their own anyway.

In my current Dragon Heist game, because Waterdeep has very serious penalties for killing, regardless of reason, I've ruled that NPC's die automatically to anything other than melee attacks. But, that's my house rule. It's certainly not how 5e is presented.

Complaining about retconning the fiction in 5e is a pretty big hole to dig. THere's a TON of retroactive mechanics in 5e.

 

[Maxperson]

Umm, if you killed someone with a pillow or a knife @Maxperson, you'd be charged with manslaughter, not assault, and, certainly if you attempted to smother someone with a pillow, they certainly could charge you with assault with intent.

Strawmen are Straw. I said stabbed with a knife, not killed. Thanks for playing the Straw game, though. You've demonstrated yet again that you just can't post without playing it.

You're trying to apply a specific definition of "lethal" as in the legal definition, to the argument, and I think that's where we're getting tripped up, because, to me, lethal means, "something that kills you". A lethal dose of a drug is enough of a drug to kill you. If it didn't kill you, then it wasn't a lethal dose.

Words. They often have more than one definition.

Being shot with a gun may be lethal, if you die. If you didn't die, then it wasn't a lethal wound.

And yet it never stops being lethal force.

But, all that being said, you're still ignoring the fact that you cannot narrate any wound until after everything is done. Say you fireball the target and drop it below 0 HP. What wounds has it actually taken? You cannot narrate it as a lethal wound, because it hasn't died yet. In fact, until that 3rd death save is failed, you cannot narrate any wound as being life threatening. Because, otherwise, it doesn't make much sense that your arterial spray is healed 100% by the next day.

Overnight healing is another issue I have with 5e that I will eventually fix. Even a wound that knocks you out wouldn't be healed by the end of a long rest.

Now, lots of DM's ignore this and fair enough, but, by the mechanics of the game, you cannot actually narrate any wound until combat is completely finished or the target is truly dead. Because, frankly, you cannot know what any of those wounds are until either of those two conditions are met. Either they are minor wounds that are easily ignored (healed in 24 hours) or they are mortal wounds.

That's a False Dichotomy. Those are not the only two choices. You can in fact have a wound that is not minor or mortal, yet allow the PC to ignore it, because game.

In my current Dragon Heist game, because Waterdeep has very serious penalties for killing, regardless of reason, I've ruled that NPC's die automatically to anything other than melee attacks. But, that's my house rule. It's certainly not how 5e is presented.

Automatically die is in there is no damage roll, they just die? Or automatically die when they hit 0, which is how 5e does do it?

"Most DMs have a monster die the instant it drops to 0 hit points, rather than having it fall unconscious and make death saving throws. Mighty villains and special nonplayer characters are common exceptions; the DM might have them fall unconscious and follow the same rules as player characters."

So BBEG's and special NPCs might use PC rules, but the rest just die at 0.

 

[Kurviak]

"Most DMs have a monster die the instant it drops to 0 hit points, rather than having it fall unconscious and make death saving throws. Mighty villains and special nonplayer characters are common exceptions; the DM might have them fall unconscious and follow the same rules as player characters."

So BBEG's and special NPCs might use PC rules, but the rest just die at 0.

This reads like a suggestion and not a rule

 

[Kurviak]

Overnight healing is another issue I have with 5e that I will eventually fix. Even a wound that knocks you out wouldn't be healed by the end of a long rest.

You can house rule whatever fits your group style, but then we start talking about a customized edition, and that’s an entirely different beast

 

[Maxperson]

This reads like a suggestion and not a rule

All rules are suggestions. In any case, it's not a house rule to play the game the way they suggest.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Reasonableness is the key. If I hit someone with a pillow, even if some fluke happens and they die, I'm not going to be charged with Assault With a Deadly Weapon. If I stab someone with a knife I will. If something can reasonably be expected to cause death, it would be lethal force. Just look at police use of force. Shooting someone with beanbags is not considered to be lethal force, despite them occasionally killing someone. Shooting them with a gun is lethal force, despite the fact that many people survive. I'm applying the similar standards to the game, which makes it more realistic.

But its not that the beanbags do some 'other type of damage', they just don't do MUCH damage. Shoot someone point blank with a beanbag, its bad news, or shoot them 10 times with them, still bad news. I mean, D&D's hit points are obviously simplistic in some sense, as is the concept of 'damage' purely an abstraction, but the point still stands. There's no real divide between what is and isn't potentially lethal. You can construct a perfectly plausible narrative that leads to either the target being dead or being disabled for ANY attack, right?

Beyond that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] et al are right that 4e certainly lacks such a division. Its simply not MECHANICALLY correct talk about lethal and non-lethal types of damage in either that game, or as [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] points out, in 5e either. Classic D&D also lacked such a distinction (there was a sidebar in 2e IIRC with some optional rules, and 1e had a rule that only applied to dragons).

 

[Maxperson]

But its not that the beanbags do some 'other type of damage', they just don't do MUCH damage. Shoot someone point blank with a beanbag, its bad news, or shoot them 10 times with them, still bad news. I mean, D&D's hit points are obviously simplistic in some sense, as is the concept of 'damage' purely an abstraction, but the point still stands. There's no real divide between what is and isn't potentially lethal. You can construct a perfectly plausible narrative that leads to either the target being dead or being disabled for ANY attack, right?

Poke someone a billion times with a feather and they will probably be dead. That's not the point, though. The divide in the real world and in the game world in prior editions is a reasonable likelihood to cause death. Poking someone with a feather isn't going to reasonably result in death, so it will be considered non-lethal damage. The same with a punch. That shifts when you look at master martial artists who know where and how to strike to kill with a punch. A normal person doesn't have a reasonable expectation of causing death if he punches someone.

It's like the difference between a penny and a $100 bill. Sure they are both money, but you can only reasonably expect to be able to buy things with the $100 bill. That penny isn't likely to be able to purchase things on its own.

Beyond that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] et al are right that 4e certainly lacks such a division. Its simply not MECHANICALLY correct talk about lethal and non-lethal types of damage in either that game, or as [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] points out, in 5e either.

If they didn't have that division, you couldn't knock anyone out. There must be both lethal and non-lethal damage types in order for you to both strike to kill and strike to knock out.

Classic D&D also lacked such a distinction (there was a sidebar in 2e IIRC with some optional rules, and 1e had a rule that only applied to dragons).

This is from the 1e DMG.

"Striking To Subdue: This is effective against some monsters (and other creatures of humanoid size and type) OS indicated in the MONSTER MANUAL (under DRAGONS) or herein. Such attacks use the flat, butt, haft, pommel, or otherwise non-lethal parts of the weapons concerned but are otherwise the same as other attacks. Note that unless expressly stated otherwise, all subduing damage is 75% temporary, but 25% of such damage is actually damaging to the creature being subdued. This means that if 40 hit points of subduing damage has been inflicted upon an opponent, the creature has actually suffered 10 hit points of real damage. The above, of course, does not apply to player characters."

Then there was the two page combat section in the 1e DMG entitled, Non-lethal and Weaponless Combat Procedures.

So yes, lethal and non-lethal damage was in classic D&D against creatures other than dragons, and not as an optional rule(though all rules are technically optional).

 

[Hussar]

"Most DMs have a monster die the instant it drops to 0 hit points, rather than having it fall unconscious and make death saving throws. Mighty villains and special nonplayer characters are common exceptions; the DM might have them fall unconscious and follow the same rules as player characters."

Wow, you quote the point and then cannot read the first word. Note, if you actually read that sentence, it proves that the standard rule is that things fall unconscious and then make death saving throws, however, most DM's have a monster die the instant it drops to 0 HP. They wouldn't have to spell it out this way otherwise.

Arrggh, I've gotten sucked into yet another pedantic wank with [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]. I need to stop. It's a disease. Sigh.

 

[Sadras]

This is interesting, I need to check the books when I get home, I didn't realise I had been house-ruling monsters die at zero hp? I'm pretty sure DMs out there like Mercer, Colville and even Perkins have their monsters fobbed off at 0hp.

Ofcourse you also don't generally see goblins rushing to their fallen mates and whipping out a medi-kit or drawing on their medicine skill training, so there is that. Although now that I think about it, I'm planning to throw that into my next session for novelty purposes.

 

[Hussar]

Where it gets REALLY nasty is if you play with the monsters having Death Saves and then start adding healers to your mobs. Watch your players lose their collective minds as you start using whackamole tactics back at them. It's really, really nasty. And lots of fun. Easy, easy way to increase the challenge of an encounter without having to do much work. The baddies get to stand back up once or twice - kinda like zombie encounters. Fun stuff.

But, yeah, I think it's pretty fair to say that most DM's don't worry about it. I certainly don't.